An exchange is a central marketplace with established rules and regulations where buyers and sellers meet to trade. Some exchanges, referred to as open outcry exchanges, operate using a trading floor where buyers and sellers physically meet on the floor to trade. Other exchanges, referred to as electronic exchanges, operate by an electronic or telecommunications network instead of a trading floor to facilitate trading in an efficient, versatile, and functional manner. Electronic exchanges have made it possible for an increasing number of people to actively participate in a market at any given time. The increase in the number of potential market participants has advantageously led to, among other things, a more competitive market and greater liquidity.
With respect to electronic exchanges, buyers and sellers may log onto an electronic exchange trading platform by way of a communication link through their user terminals. Once connected, buyers and sellers may typically choose which tradeable objects they wish to trade. As used herein, the term “tradeable object” refers to anything that can be traded with a quantity and/or price. It includes, but is not limited to, all types of traded events, goods and/or financial products, which can include, for example, stocks, options, bonds, futures, currency, and warrants, as well as funds, derivatives and collections of the foregoing, and all types of commodities, such as grains, energy, and metals. The tradeable object may be “real,” such as products that are listed by an exchange for trading, or “synthetic,” such as a combination of real products that is created by the user. A tradeable object could actually be a combination of other tradeable object, such as a class of tradeable objects.
When a trader selects a tradeable object, the trader may access market data related to the selected tradeable object(s). Referring to FIG. 1, an example communication that might occur between an electronic exchange and a client terminal in accordance with the preferred embodiments is shown. During a trading session, market data 108 in the form of messages may be relayed from a host exchange 106 over communication links 116 and 112 to a client terminal generally indicated as 102. As illustrated in FIG. 1, intermediate devices, such as gateway(s) 104 may be used to facilitate communications between the client terminal 102 and the host exchange 106. It should be understood that while FIG. 1 illustrates the client terminal 102 communicating with a single host exchange, in an alternative embodiment, the client terminal 102 could establish trading sessions to more than one host exchange.
The market data 108 contains information that characterizes the tradeable object's order book including, among other parameters, order related parameters, and the inside market, which represents the lowest sell price (also referred to as the best or lowest ask price) and the highest buy price (also referred to as the best or highest bid price). In some electronic markets, market data may also include market depth, which generally refers to quantities available in the market at certain buy price levels and quantities available in the market at certain sell price levels.
In addition to providing the tradeable object's order book information, electronic exchanges can offer different types of market information such as total traded quantity for each price level, last traded price, last traded quantity, or order fill information. Typically, a trader may view the information provided from an exchange via one or more specialized trading screens created by software running on the client terminal 102. Upon viewing the market information or a portion thereof, a trader may wish to take actions, such as send orders to an exchange, cancel orders at the exchange, or change order parameters, for example. To do so, the trader may input various commands or signals into the client terminal 102. Upon receiving one or more commands or signals from the trader, the client terminal 102 may generate messages that reflect the actions taken, generally shown at 110. It should be understood that different types of messages or order types can be submitted to the host exchange 106, all of which may be considered various types of transaction information. Once generated, user action messages 110 may be sent from the client terminal 102 to the host exchange over communication links 114 and 116.
In a typical trading interface that supports entering orders into electronic exchanges, the speed with which a user can make a selection, such as to define an order quantity and an order type, for example, in entering an order into the market can have an enormous impact on whether a profitable trade can be made. Some interfaces offer a single click trading functionality that enables a trader to quickly send an order to an exchange by simply clicking a location on the interface corresponding to a predetermined price level and a buy/sell action. Using such interfaces, a trader may assign certain actions to be automatically taken in response to a trader selecting a left mouse button or a right mouse button, for example. In one embodiment, each mouse button may be associated with a single combination of an order type and an order quantity such that, for example, a left mouse button may correspond to a limit order for 5 lots, while the right mouse button may correspond to a different combination, such as a limit order for 7 lots, for example. When configured in this way, a trader could select either of the two choices in entering a trade by using either the left mouse button or the right mouse button to click on a price level where the user wishes to trade. Therefore, making each choice would take the same amount of time for a user.
However, the approach of mapping choices to buttons of typical input devices does not scale up. More specifically, since there is a limit on the number of choices that can be made with a pointing device having two or three buttons, such as a mouse or a joystick, only two or three different choices can be selected in constant time. There are a few other currently used interfaces that allow a user to select from a list of many choices. One of such interfaces is a commonly known menu interface illustrated in a block diagram of FIG. 2. To make a selection using the menu interface 200, a user has to move the mouse to one of the choices, such as “Choice 1” 202 in this example, and then click on the selected choice. Then, when a menu 204 corresponding to the selected choice appears, a user has to move the mouse to a location corresponding to a desired sub-choice, such as one of the “Sub-Choices 1-9,” and then click again. Looking at the interface 200, the individual sub-choices in the menu 204 cannot all be selected as quickly as each other, since the menu sub-choice on the top, such as “Sub-Choice 1,” for example, can be selected more quickly than the second one, which may be selected more quickly than the third one, and so on, because there are progressively longer distances to traverse.
Therefore, using the menu interface, the average time to select a menu item increases with a number of choices on the menu, and the actual time to select an item depends on its relative position in relation to the position of the selection means. This relative spatial dependence has been scientifically proven by Fitts, who developed a model that is now commonly referred to as the Fitts' law. According to the Fitts' law, the time to move and point to a target of width “W” at a distance “A” is a logarithmic function of the spatial relative error (“A/W”). Therefore, referring back to the menu interface in FIG. 2, since the average time to select a target increases with the number of choices “N,” the actual time to select an item depends on its relative position to the selection means. This implies then that the menu type interface selection method does not scale well to a large number of choices.
FIGS. 3A-3C illustrate a few other commonly used interfaces, a list box interface 300, a dropdown combo boxes interface 302, and a spin controls interface 304, respectively. However, these interfaces have similar characteristics to the menu interface, and the average time to select a choice in these interfaces depends on the number of selection choices, and how far the choice to be selected is from the top of the control. Referring to FIGS. 3A and 3B, if scrolling is required to make a choice visible, the time to make a selection increased as compared to making a selection using the menu interface 200. Also, in relation to the interface 302, since a user needs to make a desired selection 306 before a set of corresponding selection choices may be displayed, the process of selecting a desired choice is even longer. Then, for the spin control interface 304 in FIG. 3C, the farther the desired choice is from the displayed choice, the longer the selection operation will take. Additionally, for all interfaces illustrated in FIGS. 2 and 3A-3C, the size of the target for the mouse is relatively small, which thereby increases the time that is required to select one of the choices.
For most applications, the difference of a few hundred milliseconds in selecting items is not critical, and the existing interfaces work well. However, in an electronic trading environment, such as First-In-First-Out (“FIFO”) markets, or any other market types, where speed means the difference between making and losing money, even a few hundred milliseconds might be critical in the fast moving markets. Therefore, in relation to a trading interface, the speed with which the user can make a selection, such a selection of an order quantity or an order type in entering an order into the market, can have enormous impact on whether a profitable trade can be made.